AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 238 wordsBechu Kurian Thomas, J
Petitioner seeks for an expeditious disposal of C.C.No.578/2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Thiruvananthapuram.
On the date of admission, this Court called for a report from the learned Magistrate. By letter dated 22.02.2023, it has been informed that C.C.No.578/2019 was initially taken cognizance as C.C.No.236/2010 and petitioner was the 2nd accused therein. However, due to non-appearance of both accused repeatedly, the case had to be transferred to the long pending register and thereafter, when the 2nd accused surrendered before court on 13.11.2019, the case has been refiled as C.C.No.578/2019. As against the first accused, the case still remains in the long pending register. Even thereafter, when the case was posted for hearing for framing the charge against the petitioner, he remained absent. Despite all the above, the learned Magistrate observed that eight months' time is required for disposal of the aforesaid case.
Having regard to the report submitted by the learned Magistrate and noticing the conduct of the petitioner, I am of the view that it is not proper on the part of this Court to direct an expeditious disposal of the case. Therefore, petitioner is not entitled for any direction from this Court. The learned Magistrate will be at liberty to consider and dispose of the case in a time bound manner if he so pleases.
The original petition is dismissed with the above observation.